There were no LGBT-related questions during Monday night’s Republican presidential debate (September 12), even though the driving interest behind the debate was the Republican Party’s far right-wing.

The debate took place on the Florida State Fairgrounds in Tampa, with the same eight candidates as the most recent debate on MSNBC. About half the questions were posed by CNN news anchor Wolf Blitzer; the other half came from members of the Tea Party wing of the Republican Party.

There was considerable sparring on such issues as the survival of Social Security, how to deal will illegal immigrants, and whether the government can require vaccination for a sexually transmitted cancer.

There were a lot of boos. The audience at the Fairgrounds repeatedly booed U.S. Rep. Ron Paul of Texas for saying the U.S. is threatened by terrorists because the U.S. occupies and bombs so many Muslim nations. Texas Governor Rick Perry was booed for defending his state’s offer of in-state tuition breaks for immigrants who are not yet citizens.

And there was a lot of cheering, primarily when the Republican candidates placed the blame for anything on President Obama—including the recession and the deficit.

This was the fourth nationally televised debate among announced Republican presidential hopefuls since August 11, when Fox News broadcast the first just prior to the Iowa straw poll.

And this was CNN’s second debate. Its first was one in which it turned the questioning over to right-wing activists who posed questions that asserted their anti-gay political views as accepted fact.

There was some anticipation that the members of the Tea Party, also known as the Taxed Enough Already (Tea) party, would focus on controversial “social issues,” such as abortion and marriage for same-sex couples. That’s because the Tea Party has—despite its tax-focused identity—established itself as the far right wing of the party on social issues.

The next Republican presidential debate takes place September 22 (9 p.m. Eastern) and is sponsored by Fox News and Google in Orlando, along with the Florida Republican Party. The debate will take the form of 2008’s infamous “YouTube debate” in which ordinary citizens submitted questions via YouTube.com and some of those were played back during the debate for candidates to answer. To submit a question for the September 22 debate, go to youtube.com/foxnews.

Your support keeps us going. Thank you!

A Closer Look

The U.S. Supreme Court’s June 26 decision striking down state bans against same-sex marriage has been touted as “probably the strongest manifesto in favor of marriage” and pilloried as “a threat to American democracy.” The huff and puff will soon die down, and here’s a look at the legal bricks that will remain standing and why some might think the dissent is crying “wolf.”

Breaking News

A U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission decision Thursday could provide important remedies to thousands of federal workers who might face sexual orientation discrimination and may increase pressure on Congress to advance the ENDA.

June 26 has been solidified as the historic date for LGBT history in the United States. It is the day in 2003 when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that states could not enforce laws prohibiting same-sex adults from having intimate relations. It is the day in 2013 when a Supreme Court procedural ruling enabled same-sex couples to marry […]

In a widely expected yet stunning victory for LGBT people nationally, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled today (June 26) that state bans on marriage for same-sex couples are unconstitutional. The decision requires states to both issue marriage licenses to couples and to recognize marriage licenses obtained in other states by same-sex couples.

The U.S. Supreme Court, in a 6 to 3 decision, upheld the right of the federal government to provide health care insurance subsidies to people with low income in states that have chosen not to participate in the Affordable Care Act by setting up insurance “exchanges.”

The decision, written by Chief Justice John Roberts, is a big political victory for the Obama administration and a big relief for people with low incomes, including many people with HIV.

It is a rare occasion when LGBT legal activists find themselves on the same side of a case as the conservative Christian Legal Society and the National Association of Evangelicals. It is also rare to find LGBT legal activists on the same side as conservative Justice Antonin Scalia and his fondness for hewing to the original explicit language of a law.

But so it was with EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch June 1, when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that an employer cannot escape federal law’s requirement to accommodate a job applicant’s religious practices by claiming the applicant never told the employer about his or her religious practices.